Fishing in fall and winter (with as little impact on spawning as possible)

[silverfox]

Only the grossly uninformed would fall for this comparison. The Erie steelhead fishery is entirely man-made and would cease to exist once stocking of smolts stopped. It is as much an artificial fishery as the trout pond at at Sea World.

We could catch all the spawing fish and stomp every redd in Erie County and it would not impact the steelhead fishery one bit. Same goes for NY and OH and many of the Great Lakes migratory salmonid fisheries.

Does angling affect some trout fishery, somewhere? Sure, of course, but using Erie steelhead as an example of hypocrisy misses the mark by quite a bit.

Did you catch this part? "I don't just mean Erie PA."

Yes, Erie PA is probably 99% stocked. That's why I said I don't mean Erie PA. I was really talking about Michigan, heck even Ontario (CN) etc. Fishing for fall-run salmonids (not just Erie) is normal. Natural reproduction or not.

However, recent work using otolith microchemistry indicated that 41% of Lake Michigan steelhead caught by recreational anglers were the result of natural reproduction (Breaker, 2020), with wild fish assigning to Wisconsin tributaries contributing very little (<10%) to the lakewide fishery.

These management changes to the fishery have been accompanied by variation in natural reproduction rates of Chinook salmon, which can range from 45 to 70% annually based on adult salmon growth and health, river levels and temperature, and availability of prey for youngsalmon.

• Pere Marquette River: 100%
• Grand and St. Joseph rivers: 10–20%
• Wisconsin tributaries: <10%

In fact, he said that it’s well documented that about half of the new salmon entered into the lake are produced naturally, meaning adult salmon enter tributaries where they spawn, fertilize, and produce eggs which become fry which become little salmon.

(that one is Lake Ontario)

 

[PennKev]

I think the answer is that it's highly variable. I've noticed some small streams that have a handful of spawning habitat where it seems like 90% of the population must congregate in a 20 yard section of stream to spawn. IF someone were to go through there and wreck the redds w/ viable eggs in them, it might have an impact on the population. Maybe.

We can play the what if game and never involve humans.

What if a flood or ice jam bulldozes that same stretch of stream? If a particular stream has such limited spawning habitat, it's year classes may be wiped out by natural events on a frequent basis.

Anyone who regularly fishes small wild trout streams sees the boom and bust cycles that occur. Maybe occasionally an anger contributes significantly to such a bust cycle, but I'm willing to bet that it's statistically irrelevant in the larger picture.

Of course that still doesn't make it okay or ethical to knowingly destroy redds or interfere with the spawn. It's just another what-if scenario that folks can fret about. Just like how everyone worries about the water temps on Penns each year.

 

[PennKev]

Did you catch this part? "I don't just mean Erie PA."

Yes, Erie PA is probably 99% stocked. That's why I said I don't mean Erie PA. I was really talking about Michigan, heck even Ontario (CN) etc. Fishing for fall-run salmonids (not just Erie) is normal. Natural reproduction or not.

• Pere Marquette River: 100%
• Grand and St. Joseph rivers: 10–20%
• Wisconsin tributaries: <10%

(that one is Lake Ontari

Then why even mention Erie outside of some bullshit smug virtue signaling?

Just use the real damn examples you listed above.

What a load of ****.

 

[silverfox]

We can play the what if game and never involve humans.

What if a flood or ice jam bulldozes that same stretch of stream? If a particular stream has such limited spawning habitat, it's year classes may be wiped out by natural events on a frequent basis.

Anyone who regularly fishes small wild trout streams sees the boom and bust cycles that occur. Maybe occasionally an anger contributes significantly to such a bust cycle, but I'm willing to bet that it's statistically irrelevant in the larger picture.

Of course that still doesn't make it okay or ethical to knowingly destroy redds or interfere with the spawn. It's just another what-if scenario that folks can fret about. Just like how everyone worries about the water temps on Penns each year.

Because human (angling/wading) impact is the point of the thread, and a stressor on top of natural events. It's not either/or, it's in addition to.

 

[silverfox]

Then why even mention Erie outside of some bullshit smug virtue signaling?

Just use the real damn examples you listed above.

What a load of ****.

Because my point was that it's totally acceptable to fish for fall run salmonids and I knew someone would think I was talking about Erie PA.

 

[Bamboozle]

To reduce my impact on spawning fish, I keep a lookout for these little indicators hanging from low branches over redds:

 

[tomgamber]

Imagine criticizing someone else's question so you can answer your own question for the 100th time.

 

[troutbert]

I, like most people on this board, agree that native brook trout should not be stocked over.

I agree. And this is an area where progress could be made.

Which makes me wonder why it so rarely mentioned in these discussions. And it's been that way since the beginning.

Just an oversight?

 

[Fish Sticks]

Then why even mention Erie outside of some bullshit smug virtue signaling?

Just use the real damn examples you listed above.

What a load of ****.

There it is, everyone’s favorite buzzword!!!! Virtue signaling😃

Often incorrectly applied to people trying to get better management of native species on this board but never applied by the people telling others their “virtue signaling” despite watching them tell others what fly fishing techniques are not REALLY fly fishing or kinds of other interesting comments about other anglers. I am not saying you specifically do those things but the man in michigan who unfortunately has his own podcast who started that buzzword to describe conservationists because he did not like his favorite fish being labeled invasive often ironically virture signals all the time about how fly fishing has gone down the tubes because of different techniques and people are not willing to put in the time and I dry fly this and that. And then call anyone trying to deal with invasive species a “virtue signaling elitist” ironically. I see that buzzword regurgitated on this board over and over

 

[PennKev]

Because my point was that it's totally acceptable to fish for fall run salmonids and I knew someone would think I was talking about Erie PA.

You listed valid examples in your second post. I see no reason to even mention Erie other than as a passive aggressive plug directed towards PA fisherman.

 

[Fish Sticks]

I agree. And this is an area where progress could be made.

Which makes me wonder why it so rarely mentioned in these discussions. And it's been that way since the beginning.

Just an oversight?

I think that people agree brook trout should not be stocked “over” which can question the biological impact of putting them 20yrds away and because there is a tributary mouth inbetween the brookies and stocking point its “in a different wayerway” in some of our minds.

But really the bigger issue is that despite people thinking brook trout should not be stocked over they will not advocate for even if its an e-mail to their elected officials, a post on their own social media, or submitting a message to the fishing hole on PA fish and boat, or calling their AFM. Its like saying everyone here agrees we should end world hunger but when ya walk by the homeless person with a foot long jersey mikes sub most people keep trucking. The comparison is it would take active action to actually change anything and its easier to just say yea thats wrong and not do anything about it. Whats more so is of people DO advocate they will not do so based on a convincing argument. They will say I don’t think we should stock over native trout. OK well whats really happening is we are calling lantern flies and spongy moths invasive and calling brown trout “exotic” despite them being ranked as more highly invasive. Then we make millions of them and drop them in cold water ecosystems they damage.

Thats alot harder to shrug off as a manager or a legislator if people start calling in or writing than “we shouldn’t do it”

 

[silverfox]

You listed valid examples in your second post. I see no reason to even mention Erie other than as a passive aggressive plug directed towards PA fisherman.

I was only trying to point out how fishing for fall run fish is acceptable and unacceptable depending on where it happens. Since it's a PA board, I figured someone might think I was referring to Erie when I wasn't. That's all.

I should've said; "It's funny how it's totally acceptable to fish for Atlantic Salmon in Scotland, but you'll get chastised for fishing for brown trout on the Letort in the fall."

 

[dudemanspecial]

There it is, everyone’s favorite buzzword!!!! Virtue signaling😃

Often incorrectly applied to people trying to get better management of native species on this board but never applied by the people telling others their “virtue signaling” despite watching them tell others what fly fishing techniques are not REALLY fly fishing or kinds of other interesting comments about other anglers. I am not saying you specifically do those things but the man in michigan who unfortunately has his own podcast who started that buzzword to describe conservationists because he did not like his favorite fish being labeled invasive often ironically virture signals all the time about how fly fishing has gone down the tubes because of different techniques and people are not willing to put in the time and I dry fly this and that. And then call anyone trying to deal with invasive species a “virtue signaling elitist” ironically. I see that buzzword regurgitated on this board over and over

Pot, meet Kettle. You are the king of buzzwords.

 

[Fish Sticks]

Pot, meet Kettle. You are the king of buzzwords.

Not with incorrect usage

 

[dudemanspecial]

But really the bigger issue is that despite people thinking brook trout should not be stocked over they will not advocate for even if its an e-mail to their elected officials, a post on their own social media, or submitting a message to the fishing hole on PA fish and boat, or calling their AFM. Its like saying everyone here agrees we should end world hunger but when ya walk by the homeless person with a foot long jersey mikes sub most people keep trtrucking

How about telling a pleb like me that is concerned about the cause, but who has about a total of 15 minutes a year and very little money to do something about it, the most effective way I can spend that 15 minutes to help. Seriously, let me know and I will gladly do that.

The problem with you is instead of doing that, you come in here and blow up every post that mentions the word trout or fishing with all of this cherry picked research against the evil empire that maybe 3 people actually care about, and insulting people who spend their time fishing in accordance with the PFBC rules and regulations because they don't give a 6 inch fish much of a thought.

Do you want some statistics? The majority of the 13 million people in this state wouldn't know a brook trout from a bluegill. Hell, even the majority of fisherman in this state likely can't distinguish a brook trout from a brown trout. Hell, I bet there are people that post on this forum that can't do it either. So posting over and over again about how smart and well researched you are about our state fish to try to prove to people why they should give a damn about your cause is NOT going to work.

Your heart is in the right place, but your approach is COMPLETLY tone deaf.

 

[Fish Sticks]

How about telling a pleb like me that is concerned about the cause, but who has about a total of 15 minutes a year and very little money to do something about it, the most effective way I can spend that 15 minutes to help. Seriously, let me know and I will gladly do that.

The problem with you is instead of doing that, you come in here and blow up every post that mentions the word trout or fishing with all of this cherry picked research against the evil empire that maybe 3 people actually care about, and insulting people who spend their time fishing in accordance with the PFBC rules and regulations because they don't give a 6 inch fish much of a thought.

Do you want some statistics? The majority of the 13 million people in this state wouldn't know a brook trout from a bluegill. Hell, even the majority of fisherman in this state likely can't distinguish a brook trout from a brown trout. Hell, I bet there are people that post on this forum that can't do it either. So posting over and over again about how smart and well researched you are about our state fish to try to prove to people why they should give a damn about your cause is NOT going to work.

Your heart is in the right place, but your approach is COMPLETLY tone deaf.

The research is not cherry picked because there is no body of research out there that says the opposite, its the research. Its all listed in the eastern brook trout joint ventures page that is peer reviewed heavily. There isn’t like another group of fisheries scientists out there publishing studies showing invasive trout species are not harmful to brook trout.

15 minutes is 3 times more time than you need. Google “find my legislature” and tell them you PFBC not fooling anyone and you have become aware they are stocking invasive trout species listed by EBTJV as top 3 threat for wild native brook trout and have been shown to harm a myriad of other aquatic organisms in states where they actually study the effects of their stocked fish. The just say you don’t want to pay for that. With the remaining 10 min drop a line to fishing hole and c and p this message say you just sent to your senator, with the last 5 min e-mail your local news station and say youd like to them cover it.

I have done this exact sequence of events, multiple times, in 15 min and have posted petitions on this site, links to find your legislators on this site, action alerts on this site. All that happens when I did is me and 5 others did them and CRB sent in a comment saying save our expensive stocked invasive trout lol.

I have already done what you said for years but I will let you in on a little secret. There is no “good” approach to this for the subset of the whole or demographic that by no means wants to hear it

 

[tomgamber]

Wow, February already?

 

[Fish Sticks]

If 100 people did what I suggested above it would REALLY move the needle. These senators and congressman’s offices might only get 100 or so calls a month. 3-6 on one single issue is a BIG DEAL.

 

[Silent Ocelot]

is NOT going to work.

His posts have actually made me better understand the damage the PFBC has done and the overall environmental impact that the stocking program does, so in that case it did work. I was never fully behind the stocking program and just think the amount of dedication people have for stocked fish is pretty silly. Funnier still that the post famous PA streams are fully self-sustained wild fisheries.

I will say he can be aggressive (as I can be too), but if you take into account how f***ked up the fisheries management in PA is or the lack thereof, I can understand how one could become disgruntled. Whatever your opinions are about the man, he posts factually accurate info with sources and I have not seen anyone combat and defeat his points using valid counterpoints.

I would say his posts are similar to reading Lovecraft, and no, I am not comparing FS to Lovecraft himself, just an analogy, but like with Lovecraft, once you get past the repetitive writing and lengthy descriptions you realize it is really really good writing. I just wish FS would proofread and eliminate the grammatical errors in some of his posts. That would make them easier to read and would help to make his views seem more legit (just a minor complaint). I'm a stickler for good grammar/spelling and proofread my own posts as I know I have a tendency to ramble and I want to make what I say sound coherent.

Overall I agree with FS's statement of doing a sociology study on this very thread to study the schism between fishing and conservation. That would be interesting. It is truly astounding how a century of stocking has really changed the mindset of the majority of PA anglers.

 

[Fish Sticks]

His posts have actually made me better understand the damage the PFBC has done and the overall environmental impact that the stocking program does, so in that case it did work. I was never fully behind the stocking program and just think the amount of dedication people have for stocked fish is pretty silly. Funnier still that the post famous PA streams are fully self-sustained wild fisheries.

I will say he can be aggressive (as I can be too), but if you take into account how f***ked up the fisheries management in PA is or the lack thereof, I can understand how one could become disgruntled. Whatever your opinions are about the man, he posts factually accurate info with sources and I have not seen anyone combat and defeat his points using valid counterpoints.

I would say his posts are similar to reading Lovecraft, and no, I am not comparing FS to Lovecraft himself, just an analogy, but like with Lovecraft, once you get past the repetitive writing and lengthy descriptions you realize it is really really good writing. I just wish FS would proofread and eliminate the grammatical errors in some of his posts. That would make them easier to read and would help to make his views seem more legit (just a minor complaint). I'm a stickler for good grammar/spelling and proofread my own posts as I know I have a tendency to ramble and I want to make what I say sound coherent.

Overall I agree with FS's statement of doing a sociology study on this very thread to study the schism between fishing and conservation. That would be interesting. It is truly astounding how a century of stocking has really changed the mindset of the majority of PA anglers.

I am afflicted with a medical condition called sausage thumbs and I type fast and never proof read. Guilty